The embattled founder of the Good Men Project remains on the defensive, and appears to be willing to take a stand against all comers. Tom is having his Tiananmen Moment, standing alone in front of a tank with a handful of groceries from the mini-mart.

I like that in a man. But of course I like it a lot better when it looks like courage instead of stupidity; when the stand means something and when the tank is not the very same one you were driving six months ago.

But that is where Tom is; staring down a monster he created; hoisted with his own petard. If he can stop staring at that tank for a moment, and looks down, he will see two feet, both of them riddled with bullets from his own gun.

I am not saying Tom is not a good businessman. He has a record of success in areas where his opinion on sexual politics and his own bizarre personality were not products he was trying to peddle.

I suppose you can put any manner of drivel on a website (which Tom has done) and with a little luck recoup your half mil of seed money. Maybe even make a buck. Hey, look at Jezebel.com.

Look at the entire mainstream, for that matter.

However, during his time at GMP, Matlack has managed the seemingly impossible. He has, largely by dumping money and copious amounts of feminist bullshit into it, produced a high traffic website – purported to be a positive one about the lives of men – founded on approval from man-hating ideologues and the virulently anti-male content they produce.

Then, because Tom does not understand feminists any more than he does his own manhood, he manages to not just run off most of his mainstream feminist writers, but has them so angry that they are waging war on him and his website even as we speak. All across the grrl-o-sphere, Tom has recently been shat upon by the feminists that used to write for his website.

And now he is publicly staring them down, like he has grande cajones.

All this while still managing to have his name become synonymous with a joke (at best) in the men’s movement, the only place there is that is actually having a really substantive discussion about men.

His response to all this is to rely even more on the cartoonish version of manhood he has propped himself up with at GMP all along.

At least that is what is on the surface. That’s the best dog and pony show that Matlack could cook up for readers, because the real story of what is happening is just too much of a hit to Matlack’s 1950’s machismo.

What we are really witnessing here is Matlack extending a hand to his feminist masters and offering another dance, assuring them that he has taken lessons and won’t step on their feet again.

In the articles excoriating Matlack, written by mainstream feminists, the message, the demand, is clear. Quit allowing MRAs to have a voice. Don’t print their articles. Don’t allow their comments. Shut them the fuck up and get back to being what GMP started out to be, a feminist dominated, woman centered men’s website.

And if you are paying attention to what is happening, you can already see that Tom’s stand in front of that tank is actually on his knees.

I wrote a few articles for GMP when they made the foolish choice to actually talk about men’s issues for a while. They had some really catchy titles, but they have all since been renamed to “404 Error – Page not Found.”

Yeah, that is catchy, too, I guess, but a little redundant. Still, they appear to like it, as they have similarly renamed articles by Girl Writes What and Dr. Elly Tams.

Oh yeah, Tom, you sure know how to make a stand. Inspiring, brah.

In his latest effort to appear tough while minding well, Tom makes one very interesting proclamation.

He tells us that when he started GMP, “Men’s Rights didn’t have anything to do with the MRA.”

Um, Tom, first, that should be MRM. MRA = Men’s Rights Activist, as in a single person. MRM = Men’s Rights Movement, as in the collective actions and progress of MRAs.

Now that we have corrected his terminology, let’s take a look at the near unspeakable arrogance and ignorance of a statement concluding that men’s rights activists, those whose mission in life is to take action on issues of men’s rights, have nothing to do with, uh, men’s rights.

Yeah, I forgot, at GMP men’s rights are only handled by women’s advocates.

Of course, this is bullshit. You know it and I know it, and I am pretty sure that even Tom Matlack knows it, even though he had never heard of the MRA, uh, MRM, before in his life.

Here is what I am thinking at this point. Tom is a businessman, and typically a pretty good one. He also feels pretty strongly about being the Dudley Doright of modern manhood, in part driven by his failures to meet Dudley type standards.

Tom woke up one day and thought, “Hoowee! I could make that another bidness! Mo manhood is mo betta money!”

Also telling from his article is something he has alluded to in the past, namely that he, “…started the Good Men Project with the simple premise that [he] had a story to tell about [his] own failures (and successes) as a father, husband, worker and man.”

That says a lot about Tom’s real motivation.

And he did good for a while. He got all the feminist endorsements, from places like Ms. Magazine. He got the most popular man-hating writers and set about creating a psychodrama of his own perceived failures as a man, projecting them on the world of men at large, which the feminists were only too happy to help him do.

Mo money!

But Tom has a fatal flaw in that he earnestly believes that somewhere underneath our tendency to act out our entitlement grievance by wiping out schoolrooms full of children, beating and raping women whenever possible, destroying the planet, changing the climate, making wars and blending kittens, there is still a Dudley Doright longing to get out. He knows for sure that there is a Tom Matlack trapped in the worthless bodies of all men.

And that is the fundamental problem.

Feminists know damn well that Dudley does not exist. And it will keep coming back to bite Tom on his saddle worn ass because he is all but entirely unconscious of what is happening.

He got into all this never having even heard of the MRM, and is still so far behind the learning curve that he doesn’t know MRM from MRA.

It will be entertaining to watch in the coming days. As GMP wipes out all traces of MRA expression on the site, particularly the voices of women who support men’s rights, Tom will attempt to negotiate a deal with his masters to give him a small corner of his own website in which he is allowed to express his own manly opinion.

A quisling’s agreement if I ever saw one. With enough quiet groveling behind the scenes and storefront actions to further alienate men’s advocates, he may get a pat on the head and ceasefire, if not a full truce.

But it will not last on either side.

Tom is impulsive and will eventually say something stupid about men being good. The ideologues pulling his strings (and holding his balls) will not be able to help themselves, either. They will sense the mathematically possible threat of balance to the discussion and go ballistic again.

It will go back to gridlock and tension, all because the truth is that Tom Matlack created a feminist entity to correct his own broken sense of manhood. He is just too stubborn to allow them to do it, and too weak to send them packing.

Like other female do-gooders throughout history, gender feminist, d.v. industry advocates (mostly female) are given a moral superiority pass to run amok based overwhelmingly on their status as females. Perhaps the most sickening part of all is all the foolish males they enlist to proclaim an alleged righteousness, that is at its core nothing but disingenuous and vile.http://tinyurl.com/d467qlx

The fact that the legal system is so deeply entwined with gender-feminist corrupted domestic violence law taints all areas of law, and makes support from ethical citizens very difficult if not untenable. Selling out to gender-feminist ideology (once it has been revealed for what it is) has never been an option for people of true integrity, IMO.

Open offer to Mr. Matlock: put me in charge of your publication and in six months I’ll double your readership AND have more people willing to advertise with you.

All by pissing off both gender-feminist ideologues AND conservative traditionalists at the same time. By taking the bold stance that men ARE good, and so too are women good but women are also just as worthy of criticism as men are.

Having the guts to really take a stand matters a lot more than trying to please everybody. And advertisers, they know that.

Shit, man, are you too dumb to see an opportunity here? The Stalinistswomen at Feministing want to boycott you. Why the fuck aren’t you bragging about it, and hiring even more writers that piss them off?

We desperately need such a wiki. Solaris in Australia has started one, and I promised to contribute to it but between every other project I’m on I haven’t gotten shit done. I wonder if others would be interested in contributing? It’s an awfully powerful tool.

James Williams

I think a new word has to be used in at least 5 different publications to be accepted into the English language. At least that’s what the Oxford Dictionary told me a few years back.

Bev

Then again the PC version would be personcott in an equal world but in a feminist world girlcott is about right.

Feministing is a feminist website? Well dayum, I had assumed it was some radical feminist lesbian fisting group, so had pretty much totally ignored them.
I’ll still ignore them but, for totally different reasons now.

PHX MRA

Great post. Any of our people that have been banned from GMP certainly have my respect and gratitude.

Regardless of how much money Matlack made in his prior life evidently he didn’t learn that kissing gender feminist ass doesn’t get you respect from them or anyone else. It just sets you up for more groveling. The more you agree with them the more they demand.

I used to be in a situation like that too, but I finally woke up and got a divorce. Life suddenly got much better. Maybe Matlack will wake up some day too.

TheMoralGodless

I have always had mixed feelings about GMP because their content has always had some positive attributes. They’ve challenged misandry in the media. They shed a positive light on male roles. Up until recently, they did occasionally shed a light on publish some of the best voices we have in our neck of the woods.

Some of their middle-of-the-road voices were not bad either. For instance I don’t think Ozy is that bad and I actually appreciate some of her advocacy.

But then you had the other side of it, which was giving an equal voice to people like Marcotte. And Schwyzer, one of the few people in the world who makes Marcotte seem sane and reasonable.

The end result was that the content overall came off as a Feminist attempt to co-opt men’s growing awareness of disenfranchisement.

“Men-we are allowing you to discuss your disenfranchisement. However, you are in no way allowed to discuss how we as feminists are disenfranchising you. Instead, spend your free time finding ways to rationalize how our desires should be your own, and maybe the beatings will lessen.”

THEN GMP goes and shits the bed by publishing stuff I find really objectionable, like people who aren’t sorry for having sex with unconscious people. I assume the objective of that was Shwyzer-esque self-abasement. “Yes, Yes Feminist mistresses! Men are bad, dirty, disgusting, horrible! Spank me! Oh please spank meeeeee!!!!”

But what’s really humorous is Marcotte and her ilk now pointing to the GMP roller coaster as why men’s rights can’t exist outside of a Feminist framework. As if GMP was ever existing outside of a feminist framework in the first place.

I’ve found them endlessly frustrating, with some good content and some atrocious content, some good writers and some bad. The recent selective purging of history of some of the better pieces more inclined to challenge The Establishment Wisdom (and in a fairly tame manner, actually, if you just read what they wrote) in a a manner that makes it look like it was never even there at all was kinda the last straw.

Don’t know if you read the same article I did about having sex with someone while they were unconscious, but the one I read left me wondering, “how unconscious exactly?” And no that’s not a joke, having been wasted myself I’ve woken up to find myself doing and cooperating in things I had no memory of, i.e. even though I was not “conscious” the person I was with had every reason to believe I was conscious. Without that crucial question specifically answered–and it wasn’t, we just had to infer it–the whole article may have been a false allegation of rape to the person who had sex with the “unconscious” person. The GWW article that they selectively erased without explanation that we just republished here ( http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/purged-from-the-good-men-project/ ) goes to that: did they actually wrongly accuse a person who was having sex with someone who was moving and moaning and acting cooperative even though that person was not fully awake–which the other person would not know without turning on the lights and saying “Hey, are you fully aware of your surroundings at this moment?!?”

Drunk sex isn’t automatically rape, sorry, but it’s not. Or if it is, then any woman who’s ever had sex with a drunk man is just as guilty. Make a choice, hold both sexes to the same standard or stop pretending you stand for “equality.”

John A

What was good about GMP was it allowed a variety of voices to comment.

It looks like that’s over.

Mr.Zeph

The GMP is officially a GiMP.

Sorry for the rude observation. After I learned of their bait-and-switch tactics, I was left with a bad taste in my mouth and a feeling of being used. No need to elaborate.

TheMoralGodless

I think it’s irresponsible for anyone, man or woman, to initiate sex on someone who isn’t clearly aware of what’s going on. Since the essay left that in question, that’s why I find it objectionable.

On the other hand, I agree with you that some feminists and white knights are being highly misandric in their efforts to expand the definition of rape, since we all know their standards will never apply if a woman is the culprit.

By feminism’s current standards of consent, I was once raped by a female partner yet we all know if I went on GMP or Jezebel or wherever and told my story I’d get laughed at or worse.

PHX MRA

Good Point. The real story behind the expansion of the definition of rape is the feminists trying to deal with the real world facts that reported rapes have been on a downward trend for years. Further the gender feminist “campus rape epidemic” never existed in a significant way. That hasn’t stopped gender feminists from indoctrinating college freshmen over the past several decades but statistically it has never existed on most US college campuses.

So the feminists are trying to expand the definition of rape so it will appear to be a problem when of course it isn’t any more of a problem then it ever has been. In addition on campuses the definition of rape is frequently governed by student conduct policies that deprive those accused of most of their legal rights to defense. So even if a person can’t legally be charged or convicted of rape they can be held to a lower legal standard, denied a defense and be expelled from school.

As you note, if every person that has a few drinks or tokes before they have sex can retroactively be accused of rape then all bets are off.

None of us know the actual stats but I’m betting there is more buzzed sex than sober sex going on out there. Just saying that ain’t rape.

Bev

“Good Point. The real story behind the expansion of the definition of rape is the feminists trying to deal with the real world facts that reported rapes have been on a downward trend for years.”

Applies to Domestic Violence too.

The Victorian government Changed the DV laws to so broaden the definition of DV that almost any family dispute can be construed as DV and implemented the federal government DV Plan written about here. The result is DV is now sucking in government finance and resources at unprecedented rates. Police are over stretched and the courts are clogged up. To fix this even more resources will be diverted to the detriment of other government programs.

This is the result:

In the nick of time

“Despite an unprecedented police focus and $90 million from the state government announced this year, he says that if family violence victims and culprits are not dealt with as soon as possible, the problem will never be fixed. Community groups at the coalface of victims’ most immediate needs, including shelter, food, and legal representation, say they cannot afford to provide the level of help now needed, with demand rising at an unprecedented rate, a direct result of the increased police focus on family violence.”

“In the meantime, the number of broader family violence offences is likely to continue to increase at a frightening rate. Whether this is due to increased offending or more reporting is difficult to say. In the 2011-12 financial year, the first increase in the total annual crime rate for 12 years was attributed to a jump in family violence-related offences. Watching the problem more closely has created something of a self-fulfilling prophecy – officers have paid more visits to homes (the number of callouts has grown 23 per cent to about 51,000 this year), which have led to more charges (45 per cent of those visited) and intervention orders. In 36 per cent of cases, children were present.”

“The Victorian Women’s Legal Centre, which largely works for victims of family violence, has seen a 30 per cent rise in the number of victims in County Court in the last financial year. Judge Paul Grant, the president of the Children’s Court, has also said that at the rate child protection orders are rising, the court will not be able to cope with the backlog. Yet the government’s plan for violence against women and children, released in October, does not include advice on how the justice system should manage what Victoria Legal Aid calls an “unprecedented” rise in demand as a direct result of the new police approach to violence. Legal Aid this month embarked on the most sweeping changes to its eligibility guidelines in its history as it faces a deficit of more than $3.1 million next financial year.”

“It’s ineffective if it’s not actually addressing what is now a crisis in the courts. There will be longer waiting times for victims,” says Dr Chris Atmore, family violence policy officer at the Federation of CLCs.”

“Unless funding is forthcoming commensurate with victim demand, there will come a point where more people are not able to be given legal advice all through the process,” she says.”

What is never mentioned is men comprise 30% of victims but there are NIL resources for them except for re education programs (nil for women). The area mentioned, Morewell has high unemployment levels of young men and large numbers of single mothers with many of their children by different fathers.

Mr.Zeph

So in short–they’re spending more and more money trying to police less and less crime?

“On the night in question, there was drinking. A lot of it. I wasn’t there, but there was probably some drugging. There was music and dancing. At some point, people started clustering off into smaller groups, some of which turned sexual. My friend and this woman fell asleep together. And by all accounts, when she woke up, he was penetrating her.
Which is to say that she was asleep when he started to penetrate her. She did not consent prior. Anything said after the penetration beside the point, so I’m leaving it out on purpose. It is the mixed signals of everything leading up to this moment that are the point of this story.”

So it’s not that she was tipsy or blackout drunk, she was asleep and apparently, everyone, including the guy agrees she was asleep.

Now to many feminists any sort of sleep lovemaking is rape, but I know that in most relationships, it’s not rape, it’s a sometimes nice way to be woken up.

But this guy, this girl had no relationship. So I can agree that if the guy agrees the girl was asleep. He’s a rapist.

I was left thinking that damnit, some of hte feminist criticism was right, and of all the articles rape being context sensitive and nuanced you choose the one where the guy is screwing a woman that was asleep and then when asked goes all George Costanza on us, ‘Was that wrong? Should I not have done that?’

Of course, this just points out how tone deaf, ignorant and arrogant GMP is.

Tom Matlack realized Feminism created a huge vaccuum for the realm and opinion of men and manhood. He saw a market, maybe even a business opportunity And so what does he go ahead and do but fill the vaccuum – WITH MORE FEMINISM!…

…with enough female/feminine centric dialogue to make the grrls on The View and the Lifetime Network blush with envy…because if all we’re doing is talking about men and boys without being “all inclusive” (allowing feminist idealogues to control the discussion), we might be accused of being Misogynist or something.

Dear Tom:

If you have to keep looking for the Feminist definition of Manhood you’ll never find it where you’re looking, because it doesn’t exist. Yes, men are not women – – imagine that!

TheBiboSez

There is 51-year-old episode of “The Twilight Zone” that sums up the Good Men Project.

The episode is entitled “To Serve Man” – which is the title of a book left by seemingly benevolent aliens at the United Nations. Large groups of men volunteer to go to visit the alien homeworld.

Which brings to mind “Those that ignore history are doomed to repeat it.”

Some early feminists did aim for “equal but different” but failed to see the dark undercurrents which were apparent as far back as the suffragettes (power not equality). They to certain extent gave feminism traction at which point the gender feminists took over and they found themselves ostracised. Some went on to become firm critics of feminism.

Has history repeated itself? Perhaps. Now that GMP has gained traction it was only a matter of time before gender feminists made their move. To simple? Again perhaps but feminism has form in that it presents a “good” face until traction is achieved (in many fields) and then the mask is removed to reveal the real agenda ruthless power.

bowspearer

I actually posted the following comment on that article Bev:
__________________________________________
The problem Mr Matlack has is the same one that feminists and traditionalists have whenever they argue- despite claims to the contrary, both traditionalists and feminists both espouse versions of chauvinistic gender-based values systems.

Traditionalism has never been about the oppression of women in a conventional sense – by that I mean that it has never been a master/slave dynamic. However what it has perpetuated in terms of women is a culture of perpetual infantalisation -where women have been traditionally sheltered and given the agency of children. The phrase “women and children to the lifeboats” is a glaring instance of this.

Conversely, men have been treated as being perpetually disposable, divorced from their emotions, socially oppressed by both men and women – men who tell other men to “man up” et al and women who “want a real man” (in fact female sexuality has been a powerful tool used to police the behaviour of men) – and emasculated and ridiculed the moment they deviate from the Alpha ideal.

Tosh wrote it best when he said that men are solely valued in society for their ability to protect women, ability to provide and sexual prowess. In other words, we traditionally view men as being nothing more than walking ATMs, walking human shields, and penises on legs!

Feminism, contrary to it’s deceitful propaganda, is nothing more than the hypocritical compounding of chauvinism. It reinforces traditionalist chauvinism through the myth of patriarchy (which claims that homeless men oppress Gina Rinehart when followed to its conclusion) while compounding female infantalisation through perpetuating a climate of perpetual female victimhood and compounding male disposability by blaming men for being the victims of expendability-based chauvinism.

Further compounding this, are male feminists or “white knights” as they are correctly called

In this climate, viewing women nothing more as vaginas and a pair off tits on legs is seen as vulgar, but not only is viewing men as nothing more than walking ATMs, walking human shields, and penises on legs completely socially acceptable, but something we blame men for being dehumanised as.

It’s tempting to say that this is only a trait of modern feminism, but even the suffragettes were proudly at the forefront of the White Feather Campaign – which saw men who had no voting rights, shamed into fighting a war, to be treated as being subhuman and good for nothing except tripping over their intestines or bleeding out after their torsos had been blown off of the rest of their bodies, on the battlefield.

It’s highly telling the responses to a piece of calculated satire which recently showed up on A Voice for Men – both on the site and on their facebook page. The piece quoted 2 non-existent studies which claimed to have found the majority of women reflected positively on their experiences of being raped with a disclaimer down at the conclusion off the piece that the studies had been faked and that this was a satirical example of “evidence by citation” and other forms of academic fraud which feminists have been guilty of for years in ways which are equally victim blaming towards male victims (http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/study-reveals-female-rape-victims-enjoyed-the-experience/).

Yet whilst people were reacting viscerally to the fake study; the notion that it was satire and that it was an example of what feminists have been doing to male survivors for decades, went completely over their heads.

Is it any wonder that in at least five US states, children as young as 12 can be raped by pedphiles, only to be forced to pay child support to the pedophile when they become pregnant from the rape and it results in a child (http://www.avoiceformen.com/mens-rights/legally-obscene/).

The fact is that you cannot be a feminist and genuinely interested in the rights and dignity of men – they are simply incompatible. Anyone who claims otherwise is either blatantly lying or severely misguided.

__________________________________________

It’ll be interesting to see whether it gets deleted or what replies it gets.

Stu

If I had of ever written anything for TGMP, I would be glad they were deleting it, because I wouldn’t want to be associated with that site in anyway at all.

Tom, there was a time when I thought maybe, just maybe, you might wake up, and ditch the bitch, and put your skills to use in the real MRM and stop sucking up to man haters. If it’s so damned important to you to have women think you are a good man, then at least pursue that from good women…….we have a growing rank of them here.

“He knows for sure that there is a Tom Matlack trapped in the worthless bodies of all men. And that is the fundamental problem.”

I think that nails it – he sees himself as a hero and is following the usual hero path, all couched in the veneer of Marlboro Man humility. And as with all heroes he does not hear and will not listen, stubbornly self-sufficient… which is why he does not learn from the senseless argumentative repetition with his feminist backers.

Thank God AVfM is relatively free of such self-styled heroes.

Bev

“Heroes” comes from the Greek word “serow”, from which we get our words “servant” and “slave”.

Fits the bill very well in this case.

oldfart

More like he’s driving the psy-ops SWAT truck in front of the tank.
The friendly fire from the rear does not dissuade him,he’s on a mission.

But it must annoy him to get out behind the armor to refuel the tank while under fire.
I’ve been waiting for him to quit or get crucified by the back-stabbing man-haters.

Perhaps it’s not friendly eccentricity I see in Tom (kinda like the guy too)
But a more pernicious brand of self eating cognitive dissonance.

Tom needs to do what he encourages his male readers to do: Look deep inside himself and see if his actions are constructive or destructive.

I don’t understand how or why he manages to avoid that.
Either he’s a masochist,or he’s sold out.

Just how much pay is he really getting,and is it worth his soul?
It must be hard to face work everyday and say “fuck em (men) just fuck em.”

Well I suppose he’s got his,but that’s in direct contradiction with the fuzzy warm side he tries to show.

Reminds of that line from ‘Taxi Driver””He’s a walking contradiction,a pusher and a pimp.”
Or something like that….

I suppose I’ve been out of the loop for a while, but I thought the Good Men project was something started by Warren Farrell, initially called the ‘Commission for Men’ or something like that, that was trying to get formal approval of its status from the White House.

oldfart

Would like to add the recent focus on ‘nice guys’ being the worst is most troublesome.
Seems to be a classic case of bullying the single demographic least likely to defend itself.
Also it perpetuates a much less civil society,if men cannot be ‘nice’ then they will be something
else.

Regarding my above quote,Travis Bickle honestly replied ” I never pushed.”
Tom cannot say the same.
Ironic that Travis got lumped into the friend zone for being the clueless nice guy,then was desired after flipping out and showing “alpha’ behaviors.
It really illustrates that the behavior women seek to instill in men is detrimental to society at large.
Instead of a progressive movement that are in fact a regressive movement taking us back to pre-enlightenment days. (dark ages)
The Salem witches are back,this time with the modern twist.

This time it is the goddess vagina that is the impetus for the ‘voices heard.’
Let the trial be by water,a ‘good man’ will sink rather than float!
Hence once dead he’s found innocent.It always boils down to that,the only ‘good man’ is the next man before consumption of resources,then he’s disposed of properly.
‘Good men’ do not protest injustice,theft,lies,slander,and disposal.

Steve_85

If you’re going to downvote something, at least have the balls to say why and put your name to it.

If it was in regards to the use of the word ‘cunts’ I’m afraid I’m all out of concrete pills, so you’ll just have to harden up without them.

bowspearer

I have no idea who down-voted Proud to be M.A.L.E., but I’ll happily put my hand up as having just down-voted you then Steve.

My issue isn’t the fact that you were trying to support P2BM – I support that entirely. My issue is what you said here:

“If it was in regards to the use of the word ‘cunts’ I’m afraid I’m all out of concrete pills, so you’ll just have to harden up without them.”

The fact is that this sentiment has been used far too many times as a means of shaming and silencing male survivors of abuse that no MRA worth their salt should be tolerating its use.

The phrase “take a teaspoon of cement and harden the fuck up” and all its derivatives, as well as similar stereotypical slurs, are the reason male victims of abuse are treated like a joke in society – to the point where 12 year old CHILDREN are paying the pedophiles who raped them and then gave birth to the child from the rape, child support!

If you want to regard yourself as a GENIUNE MRA, then I strongly suggest you scrub that saying from your vocabulary. Otherwise as a male abuse survivor, I have no qualms holding you in the same regard as scumbags like Joe Biden.

To anyone else reading this, I realise that “the enemy is out there” for the most part. However when this kind of chauvinistic misandry is blatantly present within MRAs, the enemy is also very much within…

Mr.Zeph

“If you want to regard yourself as a GENIUNE MRA,”

No true Scottsman?

Also, do we really get to tell another who is and who is not an activist or advocate for men’s rights?

Just for the sake of argument, let’s say that we didn’t, what is the real message that one would want to be passing on to another here?

I think, it’s a mistake to think in terms of enemies, especially because that point of view justifies our laziness in communication. Opponents? In the way that a friend is playing for the opposite sports-team. We may compete, but it is to build each other up.

I’m trying to think of a way to phrase the positive intention behind that comment, but I’m dead-tired. It’s not coming to me at the moment.

Mr.Zeph

Nah. I think you’re arguing ’cause your chomping at the bit right rather than to cross the finish line, but hell, which of us haven’t done that a lot in our lives?

I gave it a down vote, but I don’t buy that my balls are in question. Nor are anyone else’s who chooses to down vote.

I down voted because I think the gratuitous use of that kind of sentiment is thoughtless in an arena that demands thoughtful people to be effective.

Do I feel like I am without balls because I didn’t bother explaining the obvious? No. I don’t.

Steve_85

That’s a good reason. Point taken, although I’m not sure it counts as obvious.

I would prefer that people not downvote without giving a reason, but that’s my preference and no one is required to do so (obviously)

While his post was certainly thoughtless, it is a sentiment I’m hearing more and more often over here in Australia. I think it’s a shame, but I certainly can’t blame anyone who thinks that. Like it or not, that is how a lot of guys my age (mid 20s) see things.

napocapo69

There is a huge misunderstanding ongoing around the GMP acronymn.
The truth is that one day Tom woke up and realized he can run a new business with a new chivalry tale, a brand new Good Money Project.
And suddenly he catched the biggest potential of this project: he can also gather a bunch of people, most of them women, most of them actively advocating the hatred of males, with whom he may have some interesting “personal” intercourse, another interesting flipside of the project, the Get My Penis.

Kris W

Every-time I see GMP I think “GIMP”, inno maybe it is just me…..

Gamerp4

>But Tom has a fatal flaw in that he earnestly believes that somewhere underneath our tendency to act out our entitlement grievance by wiping out schoolrooms full of children, beating and raping women whenever possible, destroying the planet, changing the climate, making wars and blending kittens, there is still a Dudley Doright longing to get out. He knows for sure that there is a Tom Matlack trapped in the worthless bodies of all men.

Lolz I think i have my Tom Matlack trapped somewhere in my underwear, let me release it to better understand what a GOOD MEN i am.

Robert St. Estephe

As a historian of misandry, I approach this as my wont, as an event to be documented. Shall it be named “The Matlack Purge of 2012” (or did it start in 2011?). Eventually, we can compile a list of purged articles, with publication and estimated purge dates. The purge, when completed, can be described in a summary article and the list, with links to the articles’ new home(s), can be attached.

The Big House, the Good Men Project, has attempted with this Great Leap Forward to ban the voices disobedient slaves – disobedient to the orthodox authoritarian dogma of “social justice” (social engineering, re-education and genocide) – to oblivion, their memories to be buried in the unmarked graves of the social; justice project’s plantation.

But the Matlack purge has failed. The slaves will not be silenced. And the historical record will not be expunged. The scandal of this censorship campaign will be added to the permanent record of all the purges and censorship that continues to be preserved by free men and women.

These Good Men Boobz have shot themselves in the jackboot. They want monologue, but the will get dialogue, and plenty of it: from voices vibrant and never forgetful.

Mr.Zeph

I have a rule in life. There’s this thing that certain people do, especially women, most especially second-wave feminists. They have a way of recursing into an argument, constantly getting into finer and finer details, while blurring the lines. It’s a not seeing the forest for the trees kind of thinking. (Please, someone come up with a pungent and pithy way of expressing this.)

The minute I see people in my life do that, I cut them out of the loop, ruthlessly and without remorse. This is the very poisoned thinking that allows them to get into positions of power.

Note: the control of language, defining the language, is a big part of the game. “If you control the language, you control the rules of the game”. We should be able to do that too, but not just at the surface level, but at the prepositional level. Part of what I’m doing right now is an examination of the structure of their communications so as to be able to clearly observe and counter it with more potent tools.

keyster

A “Good Man” is wholly empathetic to the needs of and suffering women have endured through the ages. He’s flawed and needs correcting. TGMP will parse the reparations for her “oppression” into tenable terms ALL Good Men might understand…and pass on to his sons.

If you’re not feeling guilty for being born Male after a few hours with TGMP, there is no hope for you – and you’re probably an MRA.

FYI – They’re blocking any dissenting opinion in comments now, so don’t even bother. So much for welcoming a “diversity of opinions”. Must not upset the sycophantic base.

“FYI – They’re blocking any dissenting opinion in comments now, so don’t even bother. So much for welcoming a “diversity of opinions”. Must not upset the sycophantic base.”

This is good news.

MRAs have been showing the online world for some time now that feminism must be propped up with censorship and dishonesty.

Feminists won’t have it any other way, which is why we see Tom Matlack doing this charade of chest heaving while he is, in reality, a tears in the pillow butt fuck for his feminist masters.

Now I am thinking I was too kind to the yellow bastard all along. Nothing I abhor more than a coward with so much bravado.

You know, I once called Lisa Hickey a cunt on these pages. I should not have done that, either. She doesn’t have the depth or the warmth.

Congrats to all you MRAs out there. You have successfully robbed TGMP of their ability to pretend they are anything but feminist sock puppets.

Matlack and Hickey have gotten their orders from Amanda Marcotte and they are marching. Expect her and Schwyzer to be back on their pages before long, like nothing ever happened.

Fucking cowards, the lot of them.

And Tom, you backed the wrong horse, dude. Bad move.

Mr.Zeph

“You know, I once called [someone] a cunt on these pages. I should not have done that, either. She doesn’t have the depth or the warmth.”

LOL. Brilliant. You will have to share how you come up with some of these turns of phrases, one day.

scatmaster

I too thought that was hilarious and plan to use it at some point. Something along the lines of

I would call you a cunt but you don’t have the depth or the warmth so that descriptor would just not fit.

Mr.Zeph

“Tom isn’t even human. ”

Oh come on, now!

malcolm

When I went into business for myself, my father (a business man himself) gave me one piece of advice that I will never forget; “any deal that you enter into with bad faith will not end up well”. I did have to learn this lesson on my own a couple of times when I was too clever for my own good.
This lesson applies to all these so called organizations and sites that profess to advocate for men but are really feminist false flag operations. They can’t sustain themselves. They will eventually disintegrate under their own hypocrisy and deciet. Enough men do realize when they are being bullshitted. More and more every year.

Steveyp333

This purging of MRM content is a very sinister move by the opposition.

New on Amazon

Don’t miss one of the most controversial books of our time; the unforgettable novel that will trigger feminists, arouse both men and women alike, and stay in the reader’s mind for weeks after the final chapter.

Crazy Ex? Crazy Wife or Girlfriend? Get This Book!

If you think there is nothing you can do about your crazy ex, crazy wife or crazy girlfriend, then you owe it to yourself to go to Amazon and read the reviews on this book.

Debuts in Los Angeles and New York October, 2016

Available in Paperback

Their Angry Creed: The Shocking History of Feminism, and How It Is Destroying Our Way of Life

Paul’s Corner

Advertise at AVFM

IRC Chat

Also Available at Amazon.com

Being a gay male does not mean you have to get yanked around on a feminist leash.